In the second phase, a decision is made to either entombed the core at the reactor site or remove the core to a; remote ISFSI. Environmental impact and city rebuilding should be the two most primary concerns. Once decision is made, practical limit such as enclosure of the reactor with passive heat removal should be considered. However, the word of caution is that the phase II decision should not be done in a rush.

The first action is to pour borated water into core or the spent fuel pool. If the entombment is to build a structure around the molten core or pool, there should not be any
impact on the system reactivity.

With respect to heat transfer, the entombment should be built in such a way that lower and upper vents would.allow heat removal through air convection. If the entombment is to pour some type of materials directly on the molten core or spent fuel in dried pool, it depends on the material. The staff believes, the environment is probably too hot for the concrete to cure. The other option may be the use of sand with boron frits which could turn into glass if added at the appropriate temperature. This would immobilize the radionuclides but longer cooling time might be required.

The staff believes it might be prudent to wait for longer cooling time in order to allow the removal of core and spent fuel debris in the pool similar to the TMI recovery.

Another option might be the use of a filtered flexible confinement barrier around the core and the spent fuel pool.

<b>Our FOIA archives feature collected and sorted FOIA documents, and are sub-categorized by event, topic, importance, and type.
Email chains are extracted and published according to date.
Press releases are archived by date of publication.
Presentation materials and pdfs are summarized and displayed in whole.
Each post is titled with the date of transmission of that particular FOIA combined with the subject of the message.